Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1887-01-15
THE BILL Is PASSED.
Mr.. CULLOMS INTER -STATEC0MM BILL
PASSED BY A VOTE OF 1910 10.
Motion to Recammit Lost BY Vote Of 80 to 25-
Debate on the Bill Continued Late Into the
Night-COnsidgabl Final Opposition the
Measure General Washington News

1920 Mr.. Cullom made n motion 10
proceed with the consideration of the con-
ference report on the Interstate Commerce
bill. This was agreed to by vote Of 81
to II. Those voting in the negative were
Messrs. Blair, Cameron, Chase, Cheney,
Frye, Hawley, Hoar, Morrill,, Sawyer,
Sewell, Sherman and SpOoner.
Mr.. Hoar proceeded to oppose the adop-
ton of the conference report on the Inter
State Commerce bill.
At 2:30 p. m, Mr.. Hoar having con-
cluded his speech, Senator Sherman took
the floor in opposition to the Interstate
Commerce bill.
Senator Sherman spoke for over an hour
In opposition to the bill. Mr.. Edmunds
then spoke in its favor.
He denied that the opposition to the
conference report came from railroad man
ayers; it comes from men who were alarmed
lest, under the opposition, large andprofit-
able branches of business would be ruined.
MR. SHERMAN
said he desired to state his reasons for the
vote he would give on this bill. He be-
lieyed that no bill Of its Importance had
ever had such general support, not only
among the people, but in both Houses of
Congress The necessity for its passage
was great.
Whatever might have been the difference
of opinion in the past, there was now a
concurrent sentiment among the classes OF
people represented in both Houses Of Con-
gress that there should be some general
legislation in regard to Interstate COM
merce.
MR.. EDMUNDS
argued in favor of the conference report.
He claimed that rs short and long haul
section the Conference Committee had
merely changed the phraseOlogy of the bill
as passed, but had not changed its substan-
tial effect.
Mr.. Aldrich argued against the fourth
section of the bill. lie expressed his pro-
found conviction that il the fourth section
of the bill were enacted into law 1t would
prove disastrous to great interests of the
country. lie believed it to be reactiOnary
in character and revolutionary Of all sound
principles, and its enforcement would de-
moralize and cripple both internal and ex-
ternal commerce.
MR.. MORRILL,.
said he had reached conclusion that it
conclusion that it was his duty to vote to
recOmmit the bill. He was satisfied that
that the effect of the fourth section would
be to increase rates of freight for long
hauls and possibly those Of short haulS.
1t would not require very large percent
age TO turn the balance against the United
States, and if this should occur it would
not only damage the business of the coun-
try but the gold and silver currency of the
country.
Mr. Wilson, referring to his argument
before the House Committee, quoted by
Aldrich, said that he had changed views
somewhat. He had made Il definite study
of the question since he had come to the
Senate, and he had found iniquitiCs
in the practice of railroads. have con-
Cluded to give my vote for u measure
which believe will tend in the direction
of Justice.
Mr.. Morgan, i'll favOring the recommlt-
ting of the bill, said if he had the money
of Jay Gould, his talents, his enterprise,
his ambition TO absorb railroads and to
put them under single ownership, he
would not want any better law passed than
this.
Mr. Cullom closed the debate. He had
been listening all day to assaults on this
bill till he had almost been convinced that
he was most vicious towards the railroads,
and the bill was intented TO destroy the
commerce of the country.
THE VOTE
was taken on the motion to rccOmmit nd
the motion was reiected-25 TO SO. The
Senate then at lao passed the bill by Il
vote of 43 to Is, and adjourned till Mon
day.